Unmanned/Single-Person Trains

I recently read in the UTU newsletter about the possibility of single-person and, perhaps, unmanned trains with PTC. How close are we to this? Maybe some trains could be run by one person (no switching or setting out cars), but, to me, it seems unsafe....even more so with no one on board.

I don't think it will ever happen due to safety.

AmtrakFan

safety is a small issue compared to unions, particularly the BLEt. They will not allow that due to layoffs that will result, its not going to happen

The proposal that I have seen is for switching, etc. Operator goes over more than walking distance in cab, operating controls like today. Then at the siding to be switched, the operator goes on the ground, throws switches, etc. Once switch is lined the operator walks down to the car to to coupled or place to spot a car and moves the locomotive by a radio remote control. Kinda like a model railroader does.

I thought that Amtrak runs with one guy in the cab already?? I think CSX and UP had talked about doing this once befor with long distants trains but I don't think anything ever came of that.

Thats because the conductor is in the cars but i dont think a freight conductor wants to hang in a freight car.

Ken W2KB wrote:The proposal that I have seen is for switching, etc. Operator goes over more than walking distance in cab, operating controls like today. Then at the siding to be switched, the operator goes on the ground, throws switches, etc. Once switch is lined the operator walks down to the car to to coupled or place to spot a car and moves the locomotive by a radio remote control. Kinda like a model railroader does.

I thought that was already in many places, using systems such as CANAC Beltpak remote control. Especially in flat-switching yards. As would be expected, there are diametrically opposed views from the unions and the railroads as to whether this is safer and more efficent than 2 man operations.

South Dakota had a few RR's that usually have just the hogger, but the conductor follows along on the highway.

I don't see this happening here in Southern California. Partly with some of the traffic passing thru here.

There maybe some remote stuff happening in the yards, I'm not sure, but I don't see it on the mainline traffic.

Sir Ray wrote:I thought that was already in many places, using systems such as CANAC Beltpak remote control. Especially in flat-switching yards. As would be expected, there are diametrically opposed views from the unions and the railroads as to whether this is safer and more efficent than 2 man operations.

The primary concern I have is that there's no engineer to protect the point up front if both men are on the ground. Theoretically one of the ground men is supposed to ride the engine to protect the shove, but in many cases thie ends up killing productivity.

I can't really forsee one man operations in most places. Ask any railroadser, though, and they KNOW some guy who knows someone else who works on some other line where one man crews are already in place.

You get the point protection in most cases through "Pullback" sensors on the tracks that ramp down the speed of the motor at certain points. The sensors or "pucks" go from 9 mph down to Stop in increments of 1 mph and are spaced evenly down whatever "zone" you are pulling back on. This eliminates the need for a man on the point during the pullback (theoretically). Now if you work in a big yard like I do and your RCO zone is also shared by inbound and outbound trains, you never have complete control over the zone and someone has to ride out the pulls.

Shoving in a rail, the RCO operator indeed does ride the side of a car while working the box. Not a lot of fun if you don't have a decent car to ride.

SteelWheels21 wrote:You get the point protection in most cases through "Pullback" sensors on the tracks that ramp down the speed of the motor at certain points. The sensors or "pucks" go from 9 mph down to Stop in increments of 1 mph and are spaced evenly down whatever "zone" you are pulling back on. This eliminates the need for a man on the point during the pullback (theoretically). Now if you work in a big yard like I do and your RCO zone is also shared by inbound and outbound trains, you never have complete control over the zone and someone has to ride out the pulls.

Hope there isn't a broken rail, misaligned switch, derail in the derailing position, someone on the tracks, or so on. Those are problems that even pullback zones won't remedy.

You are correct, those are serious issues facing jobs that use the zones with pullback protection. We have a couple of Standard Operating Procedures when using RCO that ostensibly minimize those risks:

-The first thing you do after linking up and going through your safety checks on the locomotive is acquire the zone you will be using from the yardmaster. Like a prized possesion, the zone is yours for the duration of the shift and you are the ONLY one who can allow anyone else to occupy it. You release it at the end of your shift to the next crew, or it becomes inactive and the yardmaster can use it as he sees fit.

-After you've established your zone, you run light power to the end of it. This is where you're looking for misaligned switches, track defects, derails, etc. You're also testing the pullback protection. Once you've gone out and back and your zone is how you need it, you can start work.

The big problem this DOESN'T address is the danger of hitting tresspassers on the ROW. Out here in Portland on the UP, they spent millions of dollars eliminating grade crossings and posting those bright yellow "Remote Control Operation In Effect-Locomotive Cabs May Be Unoccupied" signs. Their view is that people shouldn't be walking on the tracks and they've done everything they can to protect the public. I don't worry so much about hitting a transient or other adult who knows better, but I always think about kids walking along the tracks. Very sobering.

Overall, the RCO incidents we've had out here (many more than you'll hear reported) have had almost nothing to do with unmanned pullback operations, the system works like it should. All our problems come from crews taking shortcuts, not protecting the point on shoves and running through switches/into equipment and general inexperience (of which I'm guilty of myself at 7 months on the job). Honestly, everyone here has their fingers crossed that these things will eventually go away with all the equipment problems and incidents we've had. However, from the amount of money UP has spent to implement RCO, it's probably not realistic to think that they will go back to conventional jobs with engineers.